Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmmm...
Of course there are opinions. Ball or strike? Fair or foul? Hit or error? Those are all opinions.
Theories? I guess not. I don't know of any theories in wOBA either. What do you believe is a theory included in wOBA?
Valuations? No. Those stats are not valuations. Which is why they are not so good for determining a player's value.
Ball or strike, fair or foul? If it's ruled a hit in the game then it's a hit 10 years later when looking at a players stats. Is English your first language? I'm beginning to get the impression that you're using the wrong words to make your argument because the ones you're choosing here are not relevant to this discussion. If so I apologize. It was not my intention to embarrass you or your people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
I only asked about offense. Defensive position is irrelevant.
I suppose you'll argue this, so go ahead and assume they all play the same position. You can even pick which one.
Of course their positions matter. Pick three players who all play the same position and provide the BA and OBP like I did. And their SB's, which is why Crawford blew away Damon in my comparison. I'm guessing that's also why player C most likely upset the otherwise dominant looking player A above. Not that you give speed any weight while evaluating professional athletes.
Is English your first language? I'm beginning to get the impression that you're using the wrong words to make your argument because the ones you're choosing here are not relevant to this discussion. If so I apologize. It was not my intention to embarrass you or your people.
No worries. The only one you're embarrassing is yourself by making childish statements. I don't care if you continue to do so.
Quote:
Ball or strike, fair or foul? If it's ruled a hit in the game then it's a hit 10 years later when looking at a players stats.
Scoring rulings are occasionally changed after the fact. But what's that got to do with anything?
You stated that batting average and at bats were
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestrel88
basic equations done to save time and include ZERO opinions, theories or valuations about the player.
This implies that wOBA includes opinions, theories and valuations, correct?
What theories and opinions are included in wOBA?
I'll grant you valuations, since wOBA is a stat that measures value.
Quote:
Of course their positions matter.
Of course they don't.
I asked
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
Can you rate these players for me? In terms of total offense provided and in terms of offense per PA. And explain how you did so.
How does defensive position affect total offense? It doesn't.
I then said,
Quote:
Originally Posted by filihok
go ahead and assume they all play the same position. You can even pick which one.
You still won't answer.
But in order to facilitate the discussion let's say they are all...ummm...third basemen.
Quote:
Pick three players who all play the same position and provide the BA and OBP like I did.
I did. I have you three third basemen. You should be able to calculate the batting averages and OBPs yourself.
Quote:
And their SB's,
Assume they all have 0 stolen bases
Now, will you please rank the players in order of total offensive production and production per PA. And explain to me how you did so. Thank you.
Quote:
which is why Crawford blew away Damon in my comparison.
Crawford did not blow away Damon? You clearly indicated that Damon had the higher WAR.
WAR accounts for stolen bases
Let's see how each player got their value
Crawford 2003: -19 batting runs, 7 base running runs, 15 fielding runs, 22 replacement runs, -6 positional runs, 19 runs total.
Damon 2010: 7 batting runs, 7 base running runs, 1 fielding run, 20 replacement runs, -12 positional runs, 23 runs total.
Aren't all statistics which require a mathematical process beyond simple counting, the product of a theory of some sort?
Who is batting champion? The man who has the most hits? No theory required, just count the hits. If on the other hand you think "Some players get more chances than others to compile hits. Shouldn't we make that most hits per opportunity?" Hits then are divided by at bats and batting average is born, based on the theory that opportunity matters.
Earned run average is based on the theories that A) A pitcher should not be responsible for runs which score as a consequence of an error, B) That a pitcher who leaves runners on base should be charged with those runs if they score, but not the pitcher who actually allowed them to score. C) That for purposes of uniformity and familiarity, the formula should be based on earned runs per nine innings.
Sabermetrics is this same process, only immensely more sophisticated. The goal is to account for all mitigating factors which might cause the data to be deceptive so that evaluations may be more accurate. The formulas are the products of a multitude of complex theories regarding what needs to be done to level the information.
If a player can have a WAR of 2.0 and 4.0 in the same year then it is far from a sophisticated process. It is sloppy, biased, and useless. Until you two accept that then there's no sense debating baseball stats with you.
If a player can have a WAR of 2.0 and 4.0 in the same year then it is far from a sophisticated process. It is sloppy, biased, and useless. Until you two accept that then there's no sense debating baseball stats with you.
Sigh...
...I assume that you're talking about baseball-reference's WAR and FanGraphs' WAR.
The reason they are different is...because they use different inputs. FanGraphs uses Ultimate Zone rating for it's defensive component. Baseball-Reference uses BIS' defensive runs saved. They also use a slightly different replacement value.
But, you're the one that brought WAR into this discussion. Not me. WAR isn't perfect. I'm willing to hear your criticisms.
How is WAR 'sloppy'?
How is WAR 'biased'?
Why do you believe WAR is 'useless'? *WAR is certainly NOT useless.
Baseball-Reference's version of WAR uses a baseline winning percentage of .320; thus, a team with zero WAR, or an entirely replacement-level team, would expect to win roughly 52 games over the course of a 162-game season. Essentially, if WAR does a correct job at explaining where wins come from, the linear regression equation should be close to or exactly:
WINS = 52 + 1.0*WAR
So, for each WAR a player contributed to his team, the team should win one more game above the 52-win baseline. Simple, but effective.
Here are the results of the 80-team sample regression:
The first thing that jumps out from the regression is how well the samples fit to the projected linear equation. I expected the slope of the trendline to be around 1.0, and it came out to be 0.97, while I expected the intercept to be around 52 and it came out to 52.7—very close.
As you can see from the graph above (if you understand things like correlation and the slope-intercept function, which most people learn in high-school) WAR measures very accurately what it attempts to measure.
Is it perfect? No.
Has anyone come up with something better? Not that I'm aware of.
Now, I'll always leave open the possibility that you're right. That's why I'm still waiting for you to walk me through your valuation of the hitters that I presented. Maybe your method is better than wOBA. Maybe you have a better than WAR method of valuing players.
The floor is yours.
I'm all eyes and open-mindedness. I'm just waiting for you to show me.
(Team president Stan Kasten and CEO Mark Walter) believe the Dodgers will become a dynasty, and when asked whether it's possible for anyone to duplicate the Atlanta Braves' era when they won 14 consecutive division titles with Kasten as president, they weren't shy.
"It's going to be done again," Walter said, "this time on the West Coast. Oh, sorry."
Projections available on FanGraphs have him at: .245/.296/.416 and 0.5 WAR in 340 PA's.
The Yankees probably will have Wells hit mainly vs left-handed pitchers since Ichiro, Gardner and and Granderson are all left-handed themselves. But, over the last 3 years Wells doesn't have much of a platoon split
wOBA v L: .323
wOBA v R: .320
The Brewers, according to official, will guarantee Lohse $33 million for three years
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Dodgers To Win Next 14 Division Titles..At Least
